I haven't read the rebuttal, but I think the author misses widely on trying to present an objective analysis of both sides of the gun violence and gun control issue. There seems to be from his thinking more unrealistic or naive opinions about what guns do and how to curb gun violence from the pro gun control wing versus those who are staunch pro 2nd Amendment. I also didn't understand his critique of the quote about semiautomatic rifles, 'designed to kill people as quickly as possible'. Guns are designed to kill, whether it be wild game or human beings. In the same way that a cast iron skillet is designed to cook but can also become a murder weapon. My mom worked for the federal government and everytime she went to work she had to pass through a metal detector and was subject to having her bags searched with two armed standing guards at the entrance. There are metal detectors at the entrance of most federal buildings in D.C. I don't think it's that difficult to keep an armed gunman from returning to his place of work and going postal. You would think the companies that make tasers would step into this gun control debate void and begin marketing non lethal self-defense weapons to the masses. One of the main problems I have with guns is the 'killing' part, not the ability to defend one's self. I really think on some level this debate comes down to those who feel unsafe in the world around and those who don't.
Sam Harris was on Bill Maher last night regarding his article. Cory Booker, mayor of Newark, challenged some of the ideas regarding Harris's understanding on the gun rights issue. [YOUTUBE]FRHGkO7aAfY[/YOUTUBE]
That's actually not true, Mexico does not have a gun ban and Jamaica requires background searches, but jamaica does have a ban on automatic weapons.
Thanks for posting this because from what I've been told since childhood from my parents was that you weren't "allowed" to own guns in Jamaica. Only shop owners and police men were allowed to but after reading several articles I think the information they gave me was based on when they were young people there. I did find a really interesting article I think everyone should read from a woman who grew up as a white person in Jamaica during the period they outlawed guns and bullets. Some incredible points were made. http://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/jamaica.htm As well as these: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010...a-murder-gun-ban-violence-chicago-washington/ http://www.davekopel.com/2a/LawRev/lrnylstk.htm I know those who are fearful and completely against guns won't read these articles but those of us who engage in debates about the topic might find this information useful.
I was going to tell you this. I thought it was weird dude was on the show after you talked about it. He made some interesting points even though Booker tried to talk over him every time he tried to. I thought his point that guns were great equalizers for women in dangerous situations was a good one. Never considered it before I heard him talk about it but it is very true.
that's wild...really sends home the message that Chicago needs help is that so? and are these gun shops selling legal guns? and are buyers or legal guns from those gun shops the ones killing innocent little girls? the problem goes beyond guns though if you ask me. they're just one tool for criminals to use. chicago needs to do something about getting people off the streets and into something more meaningful than drugs, jails and crime.
Rep coming. I seriously don't get how that point is so hard to miss. People want to compare the US to Australia and Switzerland how about giving people living wages, a decent education system, and affordable healthcare. This shit doesn't happen in a vacuum there's a reason why these mofos are violent and its not the guns. And like that article I showed from Jamaica, heavy gun law restrictions won't curb the death toll all it means is if you follow the law your ass is gonna be a victim at some point.
gun crime happens in just about any place where guns are banned, including the UK. havent looking up AUS but if gun crime doesnt happen there, i'll eat my socks :smt081 taking away guns won't stop unlawful people from killing others or doing harm. you'll just see more stabbings, people getting rolled on and blunt force trauma. shit..just take a look at any given prison and tell me how effective gun bans are. you still got those same crazy mothafuckas doing crazy shit and dropping bodies.
Never thought of the prison angle but you're right. The flipside is if those animals had weapons that's your ass homie lol. Also something real to consider is guns keep dudes your size from trying to hurt my 60 year old mother when she's home alone. It would be the only thing that would keep her safe, not the cops.
motherfucka you a 6'2 bodybuilder and YOU'RE FROM PHILLY. Shit I'd be running to the trunk if I saw you walking up my block. You'd hear the kids screaming " OMAR'S COMING"
Maybe parents should play their parts too. If you raise your kid correct from the introduction, you will have a correct conclusion. So dont blame chicago, blame the parents of chicago.
it's not any one thing but parents do play a role that's true. But something to consider is how well can people care for their kids if they don't have the means to feed, cloth, and educate them.
First you find the means, then you have the kids. Its like doing a math problem using the BOMDAS formula: dont add anything until youve multiplied your income and divided it insuring its within decent income brackets. lol. Its that simple.
you aint lying about that. the problem is you have nut bags that if you do anything they will scream foul. the nut bags are screaming the loudest and the rational people SEEM to be the few because they speak the least. All options should be on the table for review to bring down violence of any kind and of any crime.
An abstract but valid approach........If I might offer a little more understanding for the non-technical mind: BODMAS is the secret code which enables us to know exactly the right sequence of doing things mathematically. In particular electronic calculators have to use a rule (known in computing circles as an algorithm) to know which answer to calculate when given a string of numbers to add, subtract, multiply, divide etc. What do you think the answer to 2 + 3 x 5 is? Is it (2 + 3) x 5 = 5 x 5 = 25 ? or 2 + (3 x 5) = 2 + 15 = 17 ? BODMAS can come to the rescue and give us rules to follow so that we always get the right answer: (B)rackets (O)rder (D)ivision (M)ultiplication (A)ddition (S)ubtraction So as the BlackMaster stipulated , multiplication should always be done before addition, therefore 17 is actually the correct answer according to BODMAS and will also be the answer which your calculator will give if you type in 2 + 3 x 5 <enter>.